19 comments on “The Kooks Aren’t MRAs

  1. It is possible that folks have varied opinions on a number of matters.
    Just because a fellow is pro-mens rights does not mean he has no consideration for all other matters.
    It’s not paranoia
    when they really are out to get you.
    The whole Goldwag persecution demonstrates this.
    There is no such thing as ZOG.

    • There are libertarian MRAs, conservative MRAs, liberal MRAs, Christian MRAs, Jewish MRAs, atheist MRAs, etc. That is not what this post is about. This is about kooks who say that they are against feminism, but they don’t oppose feminism in any real sense, who invade the MRM and try to annex the MRM into their own movement. The white supremacists think that feminism was done by the Jews. The conspiracy theorists are against feminism because they think the Rockefellers did it, etc. In all of these cases, these kooks have no actual ooposition to feminism. If the white supremacists thought that feminism was caused by something other than the Jews, then they would have no problem with it, etc. The kooks have no interest in improving the lives of men. They just want the MRM for cannon fodder.

      Many members of these kook groups have already declared their opposition to mens rights. Various white supremacists have said that the Jews are behind the MRM. Various conspiracy theorists have said that the Rockefellers or the elite are behind the MRM. It seems that an increasing number of the kooks are declaring their opposition and hate for the MRM. All that’s happening here is that the kooks are being honest now.

  2. What an absolute trainwreck the SPLC’s report is. They slam the MRM for its fringe elements, but if someone points out the worst of feminism they respond with “but that’s just the fringe of the movement!” (of course, “fringe” figures like Valerie Solanas are much, much closer to the mainstream of feminism than kooks are to the main of the MRM).

  3. Needless to say, it is impossible to avoid “association” if enough sock-puppets stand ready to “associate” you with something.

    Which is why it is best to just ignore stupid cr*p like that.

    • There is something much better than “just ignoring”. Diversification. If there is no such thing as the “MRA” – then there is nothing to smear or make stuff up about.

      If the “male awakening” simply goes on in many different shapes and forms – then it can’t be pegged or stereotyped. Read more from Fidelbogen on this subject.

      • Diversifying works to a point, but where it fails is the law and government. As men avoid feminism and women more and more, women will just petition the government to increase its totalitarian grip on men. (Arguably, this is what already happens.) Eventually, we have to deal with the government sooner or later even if it’s just an effort to get the military and police (who are mostly men) to not do anything for women. Hence we need a MRM or something similar with a different name.

        • Diversifying works to a point, but where it fails is the law and government.

          Au contraire – that’s where it succeeds the best 🙂 If you can’t define it, you can’t legislate it away or punish it.

          Eventually, we have to deal with the government sooner or later even if it’s just an effort to get the military and police (who are mostly men) to not do anything for women.

          That’s the genius beauty of MGTOW. How are goverments going to legislate MGTOW for crying out loud?

          Will they have a “You must ask out and get rejected by 10 women a month” law? 😀 Bwahhaa.

          Will they have a “you must pamper women, and buy them presents, and beg women for approval and dates and sex and love and realtionships'” law?

          See, MGTOW is calling out the women’s bluff. They put themselves in a really fucked up double bind.

          Most of female-power today is derived from bluffing and creating plausible deniability situations. It’s derived from women artificially pumping their own value by claiming to dislike things they actually prefer.

          Women have been defining chivalry, marriage, men hitting on them (etc) as opressive for a loooooooooooooong time. So men are calling their bluff.

          Oh, so asking you out in the wrong way is akin to rape is it now? Ok well how about we don’t ask you out at all you ingrateful cunts?

          Oh, having a friendly non-sexual chat with you at work is sexual harassment is it now? How would you prefer you never have a man act friendly to you in any business context EVER? Yeah, let’s see how you like that.

          THEY HAVE BEEN GRABBING POWER BY BLUFFING FOR TOO LONG – they’re fucked.

          They’ve passed laws that a man is a pig for acting informal at work. Now you have a situation where women are depressed because male coworkers act like robots around them.

          What they gonna do? Pass a “be friendly, informal and chat up women at work” law? After they spent so much time pretending they hate it?

          Hence we need a MRM or something similar with a different name.

          The diversificiation idea never meant that there are “other things instead of MRM”. The idea was that MRM is just one of many things. Call it the “general” or artillery of the army if you will.

        • Alek, you’re not using your imagination. There’s all sorts of things the government could do. The government could close the borders to prevent men from expating, or establish a man tax (which has been suggested in Scandinavia) or establish a bachelor tax (like was done in the late Roman Empire).

          Will they have a “You must ask out and get rejected by 10 women a month” law? 😀 Bwahhaa.

          Will they have a “you must pamper women, and buy them presents, and beg women for approval and dates and sex and love and realtionships’” law?

          See, MGTOW is calling out the women’s bluff. They put themselves in a really fucked up double bind.

          Most of female-power today is derived from bluffing and creating plausible deniability situations. It’s derived from women artificially pumping their own value by claiming to dislike things they actually prefer.

          The reason why you’re not getting this is because you’re too focused on dating issues. Women are only interested in 20% of men (give or take). Women don’t want to be asked out by those of us in the 80% unless they need a bailout (which can only be done via marriage and subsequent divorce). They still want the money of those of us in the 80% which is why women love government taxation and welfare. Between 70% to 80% of government spending is a transfer from men to women. The real power of MGTOW isn’t that MGTOW don’t ask women out. It’s that the MGTOW aren’t spending MONEY on women. That’s where women the government will focus their attack, not on dating and relationships, but on the money.

          What they gonna do? Pass a “be friendly, informal and chat up women at work” law?

          Not exactly, but since you’re so focused on dating you can’t see it. Where they will pass a law is that men have to talk to women at work because if men don’t then men are conspiring to keep business and employment opportunities away from women. It fits in with what feminists have done to force business to bend to their whim so it’s completely plausible.

          Feminist control of government is a real problem, and it’s going to take more than just not asking women out to solve it.

        • Yup. Treat your job as precious, document everything, assume nothing is true unless in writing.
          And … keep applying for work elsewhere. STOP BELIEVING IN JOB LOYALTY. WORSHIP THE DOLLAR, for it grants you the option to leave.
          Companies today offer you reduced wages, reduced security, reduced autonomy.
          And all they’re asking for is your loyalty.
          Women at work? A real problem if they’re “trying to be friendly” in the passive-aggressive way, as in “if you don’t do this my way, I will get you in trouble”.
          As usual … don’t shit where you eat. At least not until the interim period between the new job and you have left the old one 🙂
          And make sure to cover your ass and stay wrapped.

        • Alek, you’re not using your imagination. There’s all sorts of things the government could do. The government could close the borders to prevent men from expating.

          You’re confused. Expating is NOT mgtow. Expating is some stupid idiotic fantasy some american men have. It’s a bunch of idiots who believe only american women are “like that”, and that other countries are full of amazing kind goddesses.

          The reason why you’re not getting this is because you’re too focused on dating issues. Women are only interested in 20% of men (give or take). Women don’t want to be asked out by those of us in the 80% unless they need a bailout (which can only be done via marriage and subsequent divorce). They still want the money of those of us in the 80% which is why women love government taxation and welfare. Between 70% to 80% of government spending is a transfer from men to women. The real power of MGTOW isn’t that MGTOW don’t ask women out. It’s that the MGTOW aren’t spending MONEY on women. That’s where women the government will focus their attack, not on dating and relationships, but on the money.

          Isn’t that the same thing? Asking out = spending money on women. THAT IS how men spend money on women 😀 You don’t see we agree?

          When I say men asking women out, I don’t mean the actual “want to go out with me this saturday” sentence. I mean taking women out, buying them dinners, apartments, clothes, etc etc.

          Not exactly, but since you’re so focused on dating you can’t see it.

          BUT DATING IS how men spend money on women and give women power. You do realize if women didn’t have vaginas they wouldn’t have any of this power?

          If men NO LONGER feel the need to date, fuck and pursue women, women are robbed of any power they have. Women do NOT have any power outside of sexual/dating power. Women ONLY have the power men give them in exchange for pussy. Do you not get this?

          The more men don’t care about pussy, the less power is given to women.

          Where they will pass a law is that men have to talk to women at work because if men don’t then men are conspiring to keep business and employment opportunities away from women. It fits in with what feminists have done to force business to bend to their whim so it’s completely plausible.

          Did you even read what I said?

          I said INFORMAL conversation. You’re talking about a law that men must discuss business with women.

          But even MGTOWs discuss business (formal stuff) with women at work. The point is the goverment CANT legislate love or friendship. It can’t force you to act KIND or friendly or INTIMATE with women.

          Do you get it?

          Feminist control of government is a real problem, and it’s going to take more than just not asking women out to solve it.

          You seemed to be focused on the “want to go out with me” sentence”.When I say not asking women out, I mean the whole act of pursuing and chasing women and asking women for pussy.

        • Expating is NOT mgtow. Expating is some stupid idiotic fantasy some american men have. It’s a bunch of idiots who believe only american women are “like that”, and that other countries are full of amazing kind goddesses.

          That is true for a lot of men who expat, but not all of them. Many men who expat know that women are the same everywhere. They’re just trying to escape feminist laws. Whether they actually do so is another matter, but expating can be MGTOW.

          When I say men asking women out, I don’t mean the actual “want to go out with me this saturday” sentence. I mean taking women out, buying them dinners, apartments, clothes, etc etc.

          OK

          BUT DATING IS how men spend money on women and give women power. You do realize if women didn’t have vaginas they wouldn’t have any of this power?

          Dating is one way women get money and power, but it isn’t the only way. The other way women get money and power is via the law and taxation with the government redistributing money from men to women. For the 80% of men who aren’t alphas, government redistribution, not dating, is women’s preferred way to get money and power. The only reason women date non-alphas now is because government redistribution is not enough yet for women to survive on. Even if all of us non-alphas stop dating women, the alphas and women will get together to increase taxation and welfare for women. Thus simply not dating women is not enough. We need an effort that directly addresses law and government.

          I said INFORMAL conversation. You’re talking about a law that men must discuss business with women.

          The feminists will claim that business is really being discussed during informal conversation. They have been making this claim for decades already here in the US.

        • I never really agree with Black Pill but this is one area where we are in full agreement. I don’t have a problem with the dating, pussy power of women. I don’t think you will ever get rid of that AlexNovy. Getting rid of women’s pussy power is a bit like saying your going to abolish gravity. Its a fact of nature…get used to it. It has existed for thousand of years….read old books and you will see it, look at animals it is there, read the bible and you will find it. Given its incredible prevalence I think its foolish to imagine you can get rid of it absent killing millions of men (as happened in Russia after WWII).

          However you can diminish the power that women wield in society and this is where MGTOW does not help. You need genuine activism. What I don’t understand is why men are so opposed to this concept. I mean women put together an activist movement. Why can’t men? Men have fought for civil rights, the environment, better labour laws. Why can’t men fight for themselves?! In addition we need cultural activism. E.g. we need to argue that creep shaming is the equivalent of slut-shaming.

  4. “Does the SPLC admit that FRS and Save are rational?”

    Hell, no, becuase… becuase… shut up, you big Nazi!

    Like TRP said up thread, there are whole oddles of cake being had and eaten in this worthless report. The feminist who shot two guys is just over-enthusiasitc, but the guy who set himself on fire is a dangerous criminal. A-huh.

    And thus was refuted the suggestion that there’s any common ground to be reached with these loons.

  5. @BlackPill –

    “Between 70% to 80% of government spending is a transfer from men to women.”

    Where did you get this estimate? I am not questioning it, I just want to take a closer look because I find it fascinating? Did some economist do an analysis?

    • Where did you get this estimate? I am not questioning it, I just want to take a closer look because I find it fascinating? Did some economist do an analysis?

      TFH/The Fifth Horseman is the one who originally came up with it. If you think about it, it is correct. Since women live longer than men, social security and medicare become transfers from men to women. SS and medicare are large portions of the federal budget. Most welfare programs can only be accessed by women. In theory this isn’t the case (although some welfare is explicitly anti-male like WIC which stands for women, infants, and children), but in reality it is the case. Most government employees are women. Overall women make up 56.8% of government workers. At the local level women make up over 60% of government workers, and at the state level close to 52% of workers are women. Those percentages are even higher when you take out law enforcement and the military which are predominately male. Women dominate government employment that is unnecessary and unconstitutional. There are also a lot of government regulations that force hiring of women either directly or indirectly. Not only are there mandates like affirmative action which impose a cost on business beyond taxes, but with all of these regulations that favor women, business must hire people to deal with following those regulations. Those people are women. For example, the HR department of every corporation I have ever worked at was all female. HR departments are heavily overstaffed because of pro-female regulations with women who don’t do any real work.

      All of this adds up, and you get 70% to 80% of government spending being a transfer from men to women. Expect this to get worse in the future as SS and medicare costs explode.

  6. Pingback: Endgame: Part 3 | The Black Pill

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s